Wanted to watch a streaming lecture but I only got sound and no video.
– Windows Media Player 11 (fully updated)
– Windows Vista
– Right click on the black video
– Choose options
– Make sure that option ‘detect connection speed’ is chosen (sorry screenshot below is in dutch, but its the option with the red arrow)
Why can’t I never find these solutions on a microsoft site, I always have to read them on some other forum obscured between all very complicated and tedious other possible solutions. Anyway hope this helps others, took me way too long to figure it out. I hope future computers have enough AI to figure this stuff out for me 😀
A list of awesome programs:
Diskdigger: Recover any file!
Euroglot: Multiple language dictionary.
Mathcast: Makes good formatted formulas and insert them into Word (as a pic)
Blogpost: When can paying people become counterproductive:
TED: Science of Motivation – Daniel Pink
In short: Motivation can be internal (sense of purpose, meaningful) or external (monetary etc.) however internal motivation works better for tasks where goals, rules, paths and more parameters are fuzzy or not known while external motivation works best when the tasks are simple and clear beforehand.
Awesome and easy to understand presentation on the LHC (background and working) by Dr. Shulamit Moed. I mean bringing together beer, science and killer legs beats, hands down, every presentation I’ve ever attended. 😉
For the ladies theres rock star scientist Brian Cox:
Also what I noticed while watching the movie Resolved 2007 was that lots of debaters accessed databases of journals etc. which require subscription fee like EBSCO, Project Muse, Lexis-Nexis etc. to acquire solid material for debate. Which reminded me of my own search of material at home. Usually I do search information at a PC on my university this grants me (unknowingly) access to most databases of journals the university is subscribed too. But when I do some late night searching on my home PC, I stumble upon not accessible papers even via Google but more via specialist databases of journals.
I remember participating in a debate where I had to take a position I knew (and everybody else with common sense would know) was wrong. However setting aside that notion, I started a decent research and armed myself with an abundance of facts and counter-facts. That combined with some slew side stepping of points I couldn’t win and some humor/ridicule I was able to win. I did feel a little dirty afterwards but also knew that if the opponent had done a little more research and had been a little bit sharper I would have lost. Heres some more debating techniques: http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-propaganda.html
The reason I remembered it was after watching the docu/movie Resolved 2007
In that movie they describe 2 different types of debating
- The classical almost clinical chessform type with clear affirmatives and negatives. The goal is to win which is determined by amount and strength of arguments/counter arguments.
- The ‘identity-purpose-method’ type or I’d like to call it the pursuit of a solution. The goal is to learn by understanding the problem and try to solve it using back and forth arguments for both.
In my opinion the first one is suitable for when you are bound to a time frame and you know the question is small enough to resolve within that timeframe. The second one is applicable to larger questions which aren’t that obvious to resolve at glance and require deeper investigation. This will require more time and is less suitable for a timed competition. Basically I see the types as different algorithms to solve a certain question/resolution both provide a good output provided they are used on the right question/resolution.
On a side note, I still find the fast debating style in competitions utterly ridiculous. If we acknowledge that it is a sport and the winner is not always right then it wouldn’t hurt to bring some eloquence and charm back to bring in more spectators.